On Sept 10, 2026, the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) issued its order in the matter of DTE Gas Company’s request to increase its service rates, litigated under docket U-21973. The Citizens Utility Board of Michigan (CUB) intervened in the case, advancing arguments to save ratepayers millions of dollars by reducing the increase. Working with fellow intervenors including Attorney General Dana Nessel, CUB successfully challenged unsupported spending proposals and advocated for stronger oversight of utility investments.
The MPSC order will allow a base rate increase of $74.5 million with $74.8 million in charges from the Infrastructure Recovery Mechanism (IRM), resulting in a total increase of $149.3 million. This is an $88.2 million reduction from the utility’s requested increase of $237.5 million, including $44 million in direct savings resulting from disallowances.
Throughout the proceeding, CUB scrutinized DTE’s proposed capital spending, operating expenses, and financial assumptions. CUB argued that customers should not be required to pay for projected spending increases that were not supported by evidence and urged regulators to rely on actual historical spending patterns rather than speculative forecasts when setting rates. The MPSC adopted many of our recommendations. The MPSC required DTE Gas to rely more heavily on historical spending data when developing forecasts and disallowed millions of dollars in projected expenditures that were not adequately justified.
While it didn’t go as far as CUB’s recommended 8.82% return on equity, the MPSC approved a return on equity of 9.8%, saving customers approximately $20 million when compared to DTE’s requested rate of 10.25%.
CUB also advocated for significant reductions to DTE Gas’s proposed capital spending. The MPSC rejected or deferred recovery of nearly $300 million in proposed capital investments, including DTE Gas’s proposed $284.1 million compressor station project. Because approved capital investments are recovered from customers over time through depreciation and financing costs, these decisions prevented substantial future costs from being added to customer rates. Additionally, the MPSC disallowed another $12 million in O&M expenses that CUB recommended, resulting in an immediate savings for ratepayers.
The final order also requires DTE Gas to place greater emphasis on recent historical spending data when developing future forecasts, reinforcing a principle CUB advanced throughout the case: utility spending should be justified through demonstrated need and measurable benefits to customers.
A major focus of CUB’s participation involved challenging spending proposals related to service alterations, customer growth assumptions, and new attachment programs. CUB argued that several of these forecasts were based on assumptions that had not been adequately justified and could lead customers to pay for investments that ultimately fail to deliver promised benefits. CUB also raised concerns about outdated assumptions used to estimate customer usage and weather impacts, both of which influence rate calculations and revenue forecasts.
The final order requires DTE Gas to improve these assumptions and helps ensure that future rate requests are grounded in more accurate and transparent information.
Another area where the MPSC agreed with CUB’s recommendations came regarding DTE Gas’s practices for its fleet of vehicles. CUB’s testimony argued that DTE Gas is proposing retiring vehicles earlier than it has historically retired them without sufficient justification, and the order accepted our recommendation to disallow $17.9 million in capital expenditures related to these fleet retirements. The MPSC also accepted our recommendation that DTE Gas develop and present a study in its next rate case on electrifying its fleet.
CUB also focused significant attention on the utility’s requested return on equity and capital structure. The organization argued that DTE Gas’s proposed financial parameters exceeded what was necessary to attract investment and maintain reliable service. CUB recommended a lower return on equity and supported maintaining the company’s existing 50/50 debt-equity capital structure. The final order established a 9.8 percent return on equity while maintaining the 50/50 capital structure, producing a more balanced outcome for customers.
Beyond individual spending categories, CUB advocated for stronger transparency requirements and greater accountability for utility investments. We called for additional reporting requirements, benefit-cost analyses, and ongoing evaluation of programs intended to serve customers. CUB argued that utilities should be required to demonstrate that major investments and programs are delivering measurable value rather than simply recovering costs from ratepayers.
The final order incorporates enhanced reporting and review requirements for several programs and initiatives. These measures will provide regulators, stakeholders, and the public with better information about whether utility spending is producing promised outcomes and whether future investments are warranted.
CUB also advocated for reforms related to low-income customer assistance and greater scrutiny of expansion programs. The organization emphasized that assistance programs should reflect the real energy burden faced by participating households and that utilities should be required to demonstrate the effectiveness of programs used to justify new spending. The final order requires additional reporting and evaluation that will help assess program performance and inform future regulatory decisions.